Comments on: Freedom of Speech And The War On Terrorhttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/28/freedom-of-speech-and-the-war-on-terror/
Life. Liberty. Property. Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time.Mon, 02 Mar 2015 19:49:00 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.1By: Christopher Kinghttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/28/freedom-of-speech-and-the-war-on-terror/#comment-3729
Thu, 30 Nov 2006 20:30:43 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/28/freedom-of-speech-and-the-war-on-terror/#comment-3729I’m quite concerned about New Hampshire and free speech in a major way, and I have every right to be:

I was an NAACP legal redress chair in New Hampshire who got indicted for Attempted Felony extortion for activity clearly protected by well-established case law of NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415 (1963) which provides that NAACP has a First Amendment Right to advise nonmembers on what we believe their legal rights to be and to seek licensed counsel to aid in that endeavor.

That is precisely what I did.

The criminal case was dropped prior to trial after I refused to take a plea after nearly two years of badgering by Jaffrey NH Police Chief Martin Dunn and Cheshire County Prosecutor Bill Albrecht; now the NH AG’s “Unauthorized Practice of Law” case is about to be dismissed as well.

]]>By: tkchttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/28/freedom-of-speech-and-the-war-on-terror/#comment-3654
Wed, 29 Nov 2006 00:35:13 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/28/freedom-of-speech-and-the-war-on-terror/#comment-3654Oh, one more thing. Some will say that the threat of a government investigation is a means to stifle dissent. To that I say, “Horseshit.” With freedom comes responsibility. If you want to spout off about violent jihad then you have to live with the consquences. Consquences which may include a visit from the FBI.
]]>By: Brad Warbianyhttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/28/freedom-of-speech-and-the-war-on-terror/#comment-3653
Wed, 29 Nov 2006 00:34:16 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/28/freedom-of-speech-and-the-war-on-terror/#comment-3653I’ve heard rumblings that Newt is a bit authoritarian, which I’ve been troubled by for a while.

Simply put, I think Newt is probably the smartest, most able person for the job. I think he understands the policy and how to make serious reforms better than just about anyone else, and he’s actually serious about reform.

But one issue worries me. If he’s got a big head to go along with that big brain, it’s quite possible he thinks he’s smart enough to be authoritarian without screwing it up. And that’s the most dangerous type of all.

He’s still tops on my list, but that’s subject to change. I was 16 when the Contract With America came about, and didn’t really pay enough attention to Gingrich between then an 2000 to learn enough about him.

In short, my answer is that the 1st Amendment will protect you in saying pro-jihadsit sorts of crap. However, it will not protect you from being investigated to see if you really have the intent of making the steets run red with the blood of infidels.

]]>By: eddiehttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/28/freedom-of-speech-and-the-war-on-terror/#comment-3644
Tue, 28 Nov 2006 20:08:11 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/28/freedom-of-speech-and-the-war-on-terror/#comment-3644The Union-Ledger article is probably wildly inaccurate concerning Gingrich’s statements about free speech and terrorism. First of all, it contains no in-context quotes to let us decide for ourselves what he actually said. Second, the AP wire report (read it here: http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap_newfullstory.asp?ID=83807 ) suggests that the context of the “different rules” quote was about treatment of prisoners, not the Internet or free speech:

[quote]
Gingrich also spoke about the need to create different laws for fighting terrorism.

Noting the thwarted London terrorist attacks this summer, Gingrich said there should be a Geneva Convention for such actions that makes those people subject to “a totally different set of rules.”
[/quote]

]]>By: Kevinhttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/28/freedom-of-speech-and-the-war-on-terror/#comment-3641
Tue, 28 Nov 2006 19:39:30 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/28/freedom-of-speech-and-the-war-on-terror/#comment-3641My main problem with Newt isn’t really so much his positions on the issues, it’s really the same problem I have with both Mitt Romney and John McCain; all three men will take whatever position they need to take to win an election.

For example, Newt right before the election put out a “Winning the Future” manifesto that outlined 12 proposals, all of which were Big Government Conservative in nature, to allow the Republicans to pander enough to keep their majority. Contrast that with the fact Newt has been the champion of limited government since November 8.

I’ll admit I’ve been one of those people, more or less. At the very least, I’ve thought that adding Gingrich into the race would make it…..interesting. Of all the potential Republican candidates out there he’s clearly the most well-spoken and I like some of the things he says.